97-13277. Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc.; Order Granting Approval to Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Use of Proprietary Brokerage Order Routing Terminals on the Floor of the Exchange  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 98 (Wednesday, May 21, 1997)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 27814-27816]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-13277]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
    
    [Release No. 34-38634; File No. SR-CBOE-97-02]
    
    
    Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, 
    Inc.; Order Granting Approval to Proposed Rule Change Relating to the 
    Use of Proprietary Brokerage Order Routing Terminals on the Floor of 
    the Exchange
    
    May 14, 1997.
    
    I. Introduction
    
        On January 21, 1997, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. 
    (``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') submitted to the Securities and Exchange 
    Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 
    Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ And Rule 19b-4 
    thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to extend from the Standard & 
    Poor's 500 index (``SPX options'') to the trading crowd in options on 
    the Standard & Poor's 100 index (``OEX options'') its existing policy 
    adopted pursuant to Exchange Rule 6.23 whereby members are permitted to 
    establish, maintain and use proprietary hand-held, brokerage order 
    routing terminals and related systems (``Terminals'') in the trading 
    crowd.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
        \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal 
    Register on February 20, 1997.\3\ No comments were received on the 
    proposal. This order approves the proposal.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38268 (Feb. 11, 1997), 
    62 FR 7812 (Feb. 20, 1997).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    II. Background
    
        On December 16, 1996, the Commission approved a proposal by the 
    CBOE to adopt a policy pursuant to its Rule 6.23 \4\ allowing the use 
    of proprietary brokerage order routing terminals and their related 
    systems in the SPX trading crowd.\5\ Written Exchange approval is 
    required prior to a member establishing, maintaining, or using a 
    Terminal. The Exchange does not approve a Terminal unless and until the 
    member who proposes to establish one on the floor of the Exchange has 
    filed with the Exchange an ``Application & Agreement for Brokerage/
    Order Routing Terminals in Trading Crowds'' (``Application 
    Agreement''). In addition, the original filing limited the use of 
    Terminals to the SPX options trading crowd for the routing of orders in 
    SPX options.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \4\ CBOE Rule 6.23 provides that no member shall establish or 
    maintain any telephone or other wire communications between his or 
    its office and the Exchange without prior approval by the Exchange. 
    The Exchange may direct discontinuance of any communication facility 
    terminating on the floor of the Exchange.
        \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38054 (December 16, 
    1996), 61 FR 67365 (``SPX-Terminal Approval Order'').
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        The Application Agreement approved by the Commission for use in the 
    SPX trading crowd addressed several important issues including 
    restrictions on the use of Terminals and the information thereon. The 
    Application Agreement prohibits the operators of Terminals from trading 
    with orders transmitted to the floor through Terminals except when 
    certain conditions are met and prohibits the use of Terminals to make 
    markets.
        The Application Agreement requires an applicant to agree that it 
    will not trade with orders transmitted through the Terminal, except 
    when (1) No one else wants to trade with it (i.e., the member is the 
    contra-party of last recourse) or (2) an applicant is able to 
    participate in the order on the same basis that other market makers who 
    do not have priority participate. Under the second exception, the 
    member may trade with an order as long as (a) The member in the trading 
    crowd who is the first to respond to such order (other than the 
    applicant) has priority in taking the other side of such order, and (b) 
    the aggregate portion of such order taken by the applicant is not 
    greater than the portion of the order taken by every other Exchange 
    market maker in the crowd who wishes to participate in the order in the 
    same aggregate quantity.
        The Application Agreement also prohibits an applicant from using 
    for their own benefit any information contained in any order in the 
    Terminal system until that information has been disclosed to the 
    trading crowd.
        The Application Agreement also requires an applicant to agree that 
    its Terminal will be used to receive brokerage orders only, and that it 
    will not be used to perform a market making function. In adopting this 
    restriction, the Exchange was concerned that Terminals may enable 
    person not subject to Exchange control to perform market making 
    functions from off the floor of the Exchange without being burdened by 
    the cost of maintaining an Exchange membership, or the obligations 
    imposed on Exchange market makers.\6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \6\ In addition, the Application Agreement has provisions 
    relating to the installation and use of Terminals. These provisions 
    relate to surveillance, audit trails, compliance, physical, 
    electrical and communications requirements and termination of 
    approval for Terminals.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    III. Description of the Proposal
    
        The CBOE proposes to amend the policy adopted pursuant to its Rule 
    6.23 that would extend the use of proprietary brokerage order routing 
    terminals and their related systems from the SPX options trading crowd 
    to the OEX options trading crowd, Exchange members would still be 
    required to obtain written approval from the Exchange to establish, 
    maintain, or use a terminal in either of the two trading crowds. The 
    Exchange would not approve the use of a Terminal unless and until the 
    member who proposes to utilize it on the floor has filed with the 
    Exchange an Application Agreement, and Terminals may only be used in 
    the crowds trading SPX or OEX options to route orders in SPX or OEX 
    options.\7\ To accommodate this change, the application Agreement will 
    also be amended to specifically allow for the use of Terminals in the 
    OEX options trading crowd. The terms and restrictions of the 
    Application Agreement remain unchanged and will be identical to those 
    approved in the SPX-Terminal Approval Order as described above.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \7\ The Exchange requires applicants wishing to use Terminals in 
    both the OEX and SPX options trading crowds to execute separate 
    Application Agreements with the Exchange for each trading crowd. 
    Telephone conversation between Tim Thompson, CBOE and David 
    Sierazki, SEC, on May 13, 1997.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    IV. Discussion
    
        Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \8\ requires that the rules of an 
    exchange be designated to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and 
    practices, promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove 
    impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market, and 
    in general to protect investors and the public interest. Section 
    6(b)(7) of the Act \9\ requires that the rules of an Exchange be in 
    accordance with Section 6(d) of the Act,\10\ and in general provide a 
    fair
    
    [[Page 27815]]
    
    procedure for the disciplining of members and the prohibition or 
    limitation by an exchange of a person's access to services offered by 
    the exchange. Section 6(b)(7) of the Act \11\ requires that the rules 
    of an exchange not impose any burden on competition not necessary or 
    appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Section 
    11A(a)(1)(C)(ii) of the Act \12\ states that it is in the public 
    interest and appropriate for the protection of investors and the 
    maintenance of fair and orderly markets to assure fair competition 
    among brokers and dealers. For the reasons set forth below, the 
    Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the 
    requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder 
    applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular, the 
    requirements of Sections 6(b)(5), 6(b)(7), 6(b)(8), and 11A(a)(1)(C) of 
    the Act.\13\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
        \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7).
        \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(d). Section 6(d) of the Act, among other 
    things, requires that an exchange, in any proceeding to determine 
    whether a member should be disciplined, bring specific charges, 
    notify such member of and provide him with an opportunity to defend 
    himself against such charges, and keep a record.
        \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
        \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C)(ii).
        \13\ In approving this rule, the Commission has considered the 
    proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital 
    formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        The Commission believes that the CBOE's proposal should foster 
    coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in 
    securities, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free 
    and open market, and protect investors and the public interest by 
    expediting and making more efficient the process by which members can 
    receive OEX orders to be executed on the floor of the Exchange. The 
    proposal also will promote fair competition among brokers and dealers 
    and facilitate transactions in options on the Exchange. Finally, the 
    Commission believes that the requirement that an applicant file the 
    Application Agreement with the Exchange and comply with it is 
    reasonable and ensures adequate surveillance and compliance with CBOE 
    Rules.
        The Commission notes that the substantive provisions set forth in 
    the Application Agreement submitted with this proposal, are identical 
    to those approved in the SPX-FLoor Broker Terminal Approval Order.\14\ 
    The Commission believes that the Exchange's policy regarding the use of 
    Terminals and the Application Agreement provide a reasonable framework 
    in which to introduce the use of Terminals to the OEX options trading 
    crowd. The Commission also believes that the requirement that an 
    applicant file the Application Agreement with the Exchange and comply 
    with it is reasonable and ensures adequate surveillance and compliance 
    with CBOE rules. The Commission notes, however, that the Exchange is 
    required to submit a proposed rule change with the Commission pursuant 
    to Section 19(b) of the Act, if it wants to extend the use of Terminals 
    beyond the SPX and OEX options trading crowds.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \14\ See SPX-Terminal Approval Order, supra note 5. The 
    discussion and findings in the SPX-Terminal Approval Order are 
    incorporated herein.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        The Commission also believes that the termination procedures in the 
    Application Agreement are consistent with the Act, including Sections 
    6(b)(7) and 6(d) of the Act,\15\ and are designed to provide affected 
    members with adequate due process. The Commission notes that a member 
    so affected could seek relief pursuant to the Hearings and Review 
    provisions of Chapter XIX of the Exchange's Rules. These provisions 
    provide specific procedures to seek Exchange hearing and review for 
    persons aggrieved by action of the Exchange in terminating or enforcing 
    the terms of the Application Agreement.\16\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \15\ See supra notes 9-10 and accompanying text.
        \16\ See CBOE Rules 19.4, Hearing and 19.5 Review.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        As noted above, the Application Agreement prohibits a member or an 
    associated person from trading with orders transmitted through a 
    Terminal, unless no other member were to trade with the order, or the 
    applicant were to trade on the same basis as other members who do not 
    have priority. In addition, the Application Agreement prevents a member 
    from using for its benefit information transmitted through a Terminal, 
    before that information is disclosed to the trading crowd. The 
    Commission believes that these restrictions are an appropriate measure 
    to ensure that an applicant or one if its associated persons does not: 
    (1) Interact with an order prior to information relating to such order 
    becoming known to the trading crowd, which would be inconsistent with 
    the open auction market principles governing the Exchange's trading 
    system; or (2) effect transactions or change quotes in the Exchange's 
    market or in the markets for the underlying interest or related 
    interests before the information were available in the market. The 
    Commission also believes that the two exceptions to the general 
    restriction on trading with orders in the Terminal system are 
    consistent with these concerns, and ensure that members using Terminals 
    trade on the same terms and conditions as other market participants and 
    do not receive any trading advantages to interact with orders 
    transmitted through the Terminals.
        For the same reasons set forth in the Commission's findings in the 
    SPX-Terminal Approval Order,\17\ the Commission believes that the 
    market making prohibition on the use of Terminals in OEX options 
    adequately balances the potential benefits to be derived from Terminals 
    with the important regulatory issues that are raised in connection with 
    the potential use of Terminals for off-floor market making in CBOE-
    listed options. Because off-floor market makers potentially would enjoy 
    the benefits of other ``public customers,'' while not having the 
    concomitant obligations and responsibilities of CBOE market makers, the 
    Commission does not believe it is unreasonable for the CBOE to 
    determine that the introduction of unregulated market making through 
    Terminals in OEX options could undermine its market maker system. 
    Indeed, the CBOE's proposal will allow the expansion of an innovative 
    technology into another extremely active trading crowd, while doing so 
    in a manner designed to ensure the continued viability of its market 
    maker system.\18\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \17\ See SPX-Terminal Approval Order, supra note 5.
        \18\ See infra note 22.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        The Commission also believes that the CBOE restriction on market 
    making through the use of Terminals in OEX options has been effected in 
    a clear and reasonable manner that is not ambiguous nor overbroad, and 
    that takes into account regulatory and market impact concerns, 
    including those relating to quote competition and price discovery.\19\ 
    Notably, the CBOE's proposal does not bar all two-sided limit orders. 
    Instead it only restricts the acceptance of orders placed in the 
    performance of a market making function. The distinction between market 
    making and brokerage activity is well established among market 
    participants. Moreover, the language of the market making restriction 
    expressly restricts only an aggregate pattern of orders, which 
    indicates whether an investor is performing a market making function, 
    not the occasional entry of two-sided limit orders. Thus, the 
    restriction on Terminal use for routing limit orders is the minimum 
    necessary
    
    [[Page 27816]]
    
    for the CBOE to bar Terminal use for off-floor market making.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \19\ Cf., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 25842 (June 23, 
    1988), 53 FR 24539 (approving certain restrictions on the use of 
    telephones on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange), aff'd per 
    curiam, 866 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 1989).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        The Commission also emphasizes that it expects the CBOE to 
    interpret the term ``market making'' in accordance with its traditional 
    definition as defined under the Act, i.e., holding one's self out as 
    being willing to buy and sell a particular security on a regular or 
    continuous basis.\20\ The definition of market making should not 
    capture parties who enter orders on one side of the market; nor would 
    it capture parties who enter two-sided limit orders on occasion. A 
    party would not be deemed to be engaging in market making unless it 
    regularly or continuously holds itself out as willing to buy and sell 
    the security.\21\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \20\ See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(38); Securities Exchange Act 
    Release No. 36719A (Sept. 6, 1996), 61 FR 48290, 48316 (Sept. 12, 
    1996).
        \21\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 36719A (Sept. 6, 1996), 
    61 FR 48290, 48316 (Sept. 12, 1996). The Commission notes that a 
    broker using a Terminal may receive numerous orders from multiple 
    customers, some of which are on the bid side and others on the offer 
    side of an SPX series. This is consistent with a brokerage function, 
    not a market making function. If, however, a particular customer of 
    a broker regularly or continuously places two-sided limit orders, 
    then the CBOE might, under certain circumstances, reach a different 
    conclusion as to the nature of the function being performed by the 
    broker and the customer.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        By approving this proposed rule change, the Commission is not 
    stating that it is impermissible for an options exchange to permit 
    users of Terminals or other similar devices to make two-sided markets. 
    Indeed, the CBOE may determine to reconsider its decision not to permit 
    users of Terminals to engage in market making at some future time. 
    Nevertheless, while it is not illegal to permit off-floor market 
    making, the Commission believes that it is within the CBOE's 
    prerogative as an exchange to prohibit it. In approving the market 
    making restriction in the SPX-Terminal Approval Order the Commission 
    noted that the CBOE was particularly concerned that off-floor market 
    making effectively would establish a market making structure devoid of 
    affirmative market making obligations that could result in less deep 
    and liquid markets during periods of market stress, when off-floor 
    Terminal market makers would not be required to continue making 
    markets. The Commission believes that these concerns are reasonable. 
    The Commission's approval of the proposed rule change reflects the 
    Commission's belief that the CBOE may act incrementally in approving 
    the use of Terminals for transactions in SPX, and now OEX options, 
    given that the CBOE is still learning about the possible impact of 
    Terminals upon its market.\22\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \22\ The Commission recognizes that markets for certain equity 
    options can be less deep and liquid than the OEX market. However, 
    the rule change approved today concerns the use of Terminals only in 
    the OEX crowd. The Commission will consider the merits of permitting 
    the use of Terminals to represent two-sided limit orders that 
    effectively create regular two-sided markets in less liquid options 
    crowds when it is presented with that issue.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        In summary, while the CBOE's restrictions on the use of Terminals 
    raise regulatory issues, the Commission believes that, within the 
    context of the OEX options trading crowd, the market making restriction 
    is an acceptable exercise of the Exchange's rulemaking authority. While 
    the Commission recognizes that there may be different ways to address 
    the regulatory issues presented by off-floor market making through the 
    use of Terminals, the Act does not dictate that any particular approach 
    be taken. The Commission believes that the manner in which the Exchange 
    has chosen to address the regulatory issues presented by off-floor 
    market making reflects the considered judgment of the CBOE regarding 
    the attributes of Exchange membership and the organization of its 
    trading floor, and is a fair exercise of its powers as a national 
    securities exchange.
        For the reasons stated above, and the findings set forth in the 
    SPX-Terminal Approval Order,\23\ the Commission believes that the 
    Exchange's proposal to extend the policy regarding the use of Terminals 
    to the OEX options trading crowd is consistent with the Act.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \23\ See SPX-Terminal Approval Order, supra note 5.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the 
    Act,\24\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-97-02) is approved.
    
        \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, 
    pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \25\ 17 C.F.R. 200.30-3(a)(12).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Margaret H. McFarland,
    Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 97-13277 Filed 5-20-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
05/21/1997
Department:
Securities and Exchange Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
97-13277
Pages:
27814-27816 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Release No. 34-38634, File No. SR-CBOE-97-02
PDF File:
97-13277.pdf